X-man Posted February 9, 2008 Share Posted February 9, 2008 depends on what direction, how you define what axis. My graphs display "1D"-events, so that should be simple to see what is going on, but the others you were referring to, seem strange. Yes, your graphs are fine, coz it depicts the speed, but the acceleration chart by yar, seems strange to me :D 64th Aggressor Squadron Discord: 64th Aggressor Squadron TS: 135.181.115.54 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frostie Posted February 9, 2008 Share Posted February 9, 2008 "You crazy foo'. I aint gettin' on no plane!" :punch: "[51☭] FROSTIE" #55 51st PVO "BISONS" Fastest MiG pilot in the world - TCR'10 https://100kiap.org Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuky Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 One quick thought for ED... any chance to get AI to sometimes fire those AIM-120 in TWS or them firing misisles in HOJ mode? They never use it right now... probably because AI is not coded to use it. No longer active in DCS... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 I don't think there's a notion of TWS or different scan/sensor use tactics for the AI, so making them do something other than they do now would require a rewrite of the AI. It will happen eventually, but probably not in 1.13. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMoose Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 Preventing scripted LUA for ECM blinking or other wise. I know it was said, but I strongly believe that this needs to be dealt with ASAP. Otherwise, say goodbye to online playing… Yea, wait for burn through as some might say, … Wait for what? As soon as you locked them with a R-27, he jams & blinks. But he does so since his script does so for him. Waiting for burn thought is not BVR engagement, sorry. I can deal with a regular jammer that uses his thumbs on his stick. You can feel the differences when you are engaged. He isn’t waiting; using semi radar weapon is useless against them. So either you fight with a Mig with R-77 or porked Aim 120 on the F15c, all other weapons is useless… Making most of the air to air in lockon obsolete for real BVR combat. Where Is BVR in Lomac skies? Antec 900 gaming tower, PSU: Corsair 750W, Q6600, Asus P5K, 8Gig Mushkin, Nvidia eVGA 280 GTX Superclocked 1G DDR3, SSDNOW200 Kingston Drive, TrackIr 3000+Vector, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro joystick, Saitek rudder pedals pro, Sharp 42" inch LCD Aquo. OS: windows 7 64bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UWBuRn Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 I think it's not made by LUA script, just set up a macro on your joystick or on your keyboard. Plus LUA script can already be disabled server side. The problem has been already discussed, IIRC if you search in this topic you will find also some proposed solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-H_m108s1969 Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 if ED make new patch , we need (for online fly) pasword for calsing.This is very important. http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=442686#post442686 http://z10.invisionfree.com/Air_Hawks/index.php?act=idx Asus Striker II Formula Mainboard (SLI Ready) C2Duo E8400 3.0 Ghz 1333mhz cpu NVDIA Palit 9600 GT 512 Ddr3 2x1Ghz Kingston 1066mhz ddr2 OCZ Vanouisher cpu cooler AsusVento Chassis High Power 500W psu Saitek X52 Flight Controller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geier Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 if ED make new patch , we need (for online fly) pasword for calsing.This is very important. http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=442686#post442686 No nedeed I suppose. What will you do in the cases of conflicts about using same callsigns? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-H_m108s1969 Posted February 23, 2008 Share Posted February 23, 2008 No nedeed I suppose. What will you do in the cases of conflicts about using same callsigns? Do you have a solution for this problem? http://z10.invisionfree.com/Air_Hawks/index.php?act=idx Asus Striker II Formula Mainboard (SLI Ready) C2Duo E8400 3.0 Ghz 1333mhz cpu NVDIA Palit 9600 GT 512 Ddr3 2x1Ghz Kingston 1066mhz ddr2 OCZ Vanouisher cpu cooler AsusVento Chassis High Power 500W psu Saitek X52 Flight Controller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mustang Posted February 23, 2008 Share Posted February 23, 2008 if ED make new patch , we need (for online fly) pasword for calsing.This is very important. http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=442686#post442686 Agreed, having a person hijack your callsign and go on a TK killing spree is terrible, i and many others here are all for a solution for this :thumbup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geier Posted February 24, 2008 Share Posted February 24, 2008 Do you have a solution for this problem? The percentage of these offences is too small to take such strong measures on it. It'd be better not to divert the ED's attention from the modelling new planes in BS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilBivol-1 Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 I am interested to know whether LO:FC 1.13 patch will be released at all or it is only a pure academic "wish list" discussion? There has not been a confirmation about the patch. All of our previous statements on the issue remain in force. - EB [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Nothing is easy. Everything takes much longer. The Parable of Jane's A-10 Forum Rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricJ Posted March 10, 2008 Share Posted March 10, 2008 Well at least an SDK for the wish list? 1 LOMAC Section| | Gaming Resume (PDF) | Gallery | Flanker2.51 Storage Site | Also known as Flanker562 back in the day... Steam ID EricJ562 | DCS: A-10A/C Pilot | DCS: Su-25T Pilot | Texture Artist "...parade ground soldiers always felt that way (contempt) about killers in uniform." -Counting The Cost, Hammer's Slammers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VMFA117_Poko Posted March 10, 2008 Share Posted March 10, 2008 ^^ Yeah! This is really important for future to keep product alive and still developing. Many developers today give SDK for their clients. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Presidio Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 I only wont the Black Shark now. 1-the FM in all aircrafts. 2-open Code for new stand-alone models (really very important) 3-more real electronic. 4-Send the CD to latinoamerica for buy more easy.:joystick: and some more things like 6DOF, etc. So we wont the best simulator never built it. hahahaha :P See you guys!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yar Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 2-open Code for new stand-alone models (really very important) open your game for modding and it will exist forever ;) if opens LO for modding (not only models), it would be bought & played not only until Fighter ops is out. no patch means: no future for lock on --- if you want to see how worse lock on is: -- play falcon 4 AF -- i was schocket after it (for example: aim-120 in f4: ~ 2200 kn; in lo: 2000 kmh :blink: --> who is wrong? ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox_one Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 open your game for modding and it will exist forever ;) if you want to see how worse lock on is: -- play falcon 4 AF -- i was schocket after it I recently took up on Falcon 4 again too this time with Open Falcon and all i could think of was "Wow 10 years has passed and still this baby rocks" Ok gfx is not so good but better than it was and all the other tweaks Thx to F4 community.. I mention this only to show what a touch of "moddability" can do for a sim ! Fox-one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team Groove Posted March 23, 2008 ED Team Share Posted March 23, 2008 (for example: aim-120 in f4: ~ 2200 kn; in lo: 2000 kmh :blink: --> who is wrong? ) im sure both are wrong. Our Forum Rules: http://forums.eagle.ru/rules.php#en Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 Actually 2200kts (at high altitude) is fairly believable for an AIM-120 depending on initial launch conditions. 2000kph on the other hand is well ... not. Far slower than the 2200kts might be faster ... we're talking peak speed of course. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunja Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 Make TIR roll axes work so we can keep the view horizontal when we roll the plane. I believe it doesnt need 3d cockpits(?). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vekkinho Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 Nice Photoshop Gunja! And a great demand! [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunja Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 sorry broken link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RvEYoda Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 Well if you fire a missile from 45.000 ft flying mach2, then it should have no problems going well above mach 4. I don't see the problem with US missiles being able to reach speeds at least close to russian ones. Why this constant belief "Oh it's a US missile so it probably cannot break 1500 kts, 2200 kts no way". Russian missiles can fly 2200 kts and actually MORE in lockon :), believe it or not. One of the problems is the missiles "speed cap". I don't even think as it is modelled right now is very realistic. If a missiles really stopped accellerating at a certain speed from programming, then certainly it would also start consuming less fuel (which is no the case here). I doubt the missiles would deploy airbreaks just so it could keep its speed at 2700 kph More reasonable to consume less fuel ;). Neither do I think it's a question of maintaining structural integrity, since the missiles can already pull g's in the 10ths, and a few more hundred knots of speed while flying straight should not make much more difference. compared to a little slower but turning 20 g. The problem with removing the speed cap is that right now all missiles have UBER accelleration at 30-35 g and don't have drag modelled at all while burning(except for the speed cap). This means that if we remove the speed cap we will see mach 8 amraam in lockon :). I say make acc numbers more realistic (easy) and model basic drag (easy) and remove speed cap. Result : Launch speed becomes important. Launch altitude becomes important. Ru missiles still have longer range for you fans out there :P. This favors all missiles. Missiles can actual work from rear aspect, energy wise (OMG) However you still have to deal with the fact that a few chaff in Lo will make any rear aspect RADAR missile lose track. Either way a slow aircraft should not be able to make a missile fly very fast, especially not if fired from low. A fast flying aircarft on the other hand, starting high and giving the missile a favorable loft path, there is your killer speed. This whole speed cap is one of the reasons why missiles in Lo cannot give chase. You cannot make your amraam catch running targets from 3nm if he is supersonic and low - forget it. It is actually possible with low fuel to outrun your own burning sidewinder since there is no modelling of overspeed damage :) (try low fuel very steep downwards dive with full burners) Now take the 45.000 ft example again, and assume the fighter fired at mach 1.5 (not that unreasonable for f22 ;), maybe amraam might slam into his wing, but wth - F-16 can do it :)) Fire the missile in a 0g path and I am sure that amraam has no problem going well above 2200 kts. It doesn't make sense to specify cruising speed to mach 4 in F-16 MLU handbook if the missile under no circumstances cannot even peak there. Note that this example is even for aim120A. Btw I am not advertising for Falcon4 AF. I find AF to be crap :P. I prefer lockon before AF even for missile fights. However there are other fighter games with missiles I prefer even more than Lo ^^ Here is some advertisement :) (no photoshopping) Edit : Just tested Lo R-27ER at high flanker cruising altitude, ER was going 2361 kts... . For those of you that don't know what I mean with speed cap check this pic from my earlier post : . 1 S = SPARSE(m,n) abbreviates SPARSE([],[],[],m,n,0). This generates the ultimate sparse matrix, an m-by-n all zero matrix. - Matlab help on 'sparse' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vekkinho Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 You're right Gunja, I see no need for cockpit redesign to make TIR head rolls! Unfortunatelly, link you've posted doesn't work for me! (Problem loading page)! Hope some day we'll have something like this: [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geier Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 You're right Gunja, I see no need for cockpit redesign to make TIR head rolls! Unfortunatelly, link you've posted doesn't work for me! (Problem loading page)! Does anyone know is head roll possible in IL-2 simulator series?! Sure visit http://allaircraftarcade.com/forum/index.php?sid=63873cb624d7b80cc097816aeec7abd9 ;) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts